Healing your gut with Diet

dfdavedf said...
Lets take a look. He says "the diet purports to starve out Bifidobacteria". It does not. It actually says the following.

Which is what?

From another page on the same site:

The strain we must avoid in our SCD™ yoghurt is Bifidus as it has been found to cause bacterial overgrowth in the gut. Bifidus comes in quite a few variations e.g. Bifidobacterium infantis, Bifidobacterium bifidum, Lactobacillus Bifidus, Bifidobacterium longum etc, in general avoid anything that has bifid in its name.

http://www.breakingtheviciouscycle.info/knowledge_base/detail/yoghurt-what-kind-of-yoghurt-starter-to-use/

It's pretty clearly telling you to avoid Bifidus.

dfdavedf said...
Honey all though on the diet is a monosaccharide, so it digested quickly, so it does not ferment in the gut and support over growth and imbalance.

Sucrose is quickly broken down into monosaccharides and absorbed in the duodenum. It is known to be a quick source of energy and yet, unlike honey, is banned.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sucrose#Metabolism_of_sucrose

dfdavedf said...
If we can just examine one thing, and get to the facts, then we have the basis for agreement. A list that long with no proof is not possible to deal with. And even more so, when the first statement is at least partially wrong.

Well, why don't you start by providing a few, suitably referenced, facts of your own? Instead of writing very long posts accusing other people of not providing the facts you crave so much.

Post Edited (NiceCupOfTea) : 1/15/2015 1:21:42 PM (GMT-7)

dfdavedf said...
You reference a diet done in japan that no one has heard of. You put it forth as if it is the same as SCD. This is just one more example of you being disruptive. If you want to start a thread discussing this diet, please do so, but not here.

Well, I'd heard of it. So how come you - with all your supposed extensive research into diet - hadn't? Peer review praised it highly. I quote:

This is an excellent paper with clear scientific data in a clinical area of extreme importance.

I linked to the study outright; not some dodgy blog site with an agenda to (literally) sell. I politely suggest you go back and read it first, and then make sneering, condescending remarks about it. Thank you.

NCOT - please put me on ignore and please refrain form adding irrelevant stuff to this thread. If you wish to discuss a different diet then open your own thread. If requested by you and if you do the proceeding I will do the same.

Aside from this I have nothing to say to you except..
Good health to you!
Thank you
David

Post Edited (dfdavedf) : 1/15/2015 2:34:05 PM (GMT-7)

BRelaxed said...
Yes, I tried many of the steps you mentioned including food journals, initial slow elimination diet, etc. I constantly looked up if a food or ingredient was allowed and adhered to it. I can't say if I was fanatical because that's subjective but I tried very hard...no one is 100% compliant because you simply can't control everything, although you can be close.

Don't worry. I'm sure you ingested a speck of something at some point which can make Dave go, "aha! that was why the SCD failed!"

It's a myth that medical researchers haven't paid any attention to the role of diet in Crohn's. They have, extensively. And that's how we know that diet doesn't take 8 months to start working. I wouldn't blame yourself; if the SCD was going to work, it should have had an effect relatively quickly.

I also checked out all the links in the blog and saw nothing which indicated that the SCD diet was being incorporated into patient care.

It's a complex issue. Nothing I've read in the past two days has made me change my mind that the SCD may help some people, but there is absolutely no proof that it is "healing" in any way. To prove its long-term effectiveness, we'd need 10-year studies at the minimum. Otherwise you may get people feeling fantastic for a few months/years, but ending up with an obstruction one day out of the blue. Lack of symptoms doesn't always correlate to zero disease activity.

In short, there's been nothing like enough studies of the SCD, or its ilk, yet. Nothing like.

Post Edited (NiceCupOfTea) : 1/15/2015 2:34:38 PM (GMT-7)

I am curious

Is what you are saying that diet, or probiotics or getting the gut bacteria in balance works?

If it is diet, I provided links to research that shows it works. You say SCD is flawed but that something else works better? Can you provide research? Are you doing it?

I have to admit I struggle with Stanford, Harvard, Penn, Rush and all the others are all focused on SCD because it is the oldest, if I understand your position correctly

I think you do not have it right (please note the word think). I think the gut biome is now just being studied. I think there is getting to be a general public awareness. The link I posted shows that this is now a $30 billion industry and it is very early. And I think everyone of these orgs have enough money and influence to do what they want. (My daughter is a doc at Harvard, and I am amazed at the funding that is available). SCD works. Is it possible that they can come up with improvements? Probably, but at this time, they are focused on SCD because they do not have anything better. That's what I think, but of course we are here to discuss.

My guess is some would say The Gap Diet meets your criteria. Is this what you are referring to? I read a few things about it, but I was not able to find enough research. I am not saying it does not exist, but that I could not find it.

If not SCD, then what. What are you doing that is working? Do you have research you can share to support your position? Please go the next step and provide a way forward if you feel you have one, thanks. I would love to read it.

"And there is no doubt that artificial sweeteners recommended by the SCD are poison for IBDers". Yes there is a doubt. I doubt it. I have never seen research that supports what you said. There is only one artificial sweetener allowed on SCD. It is saccharine, which I take. I would appreciate greatly seeing the research. I will also look myself.

Again I appreciate having a civil conversation, where we are actually trying to share information and potentially get on the same page
Dave

IamCurious said...

dfdavedf said...
it would help me if you could explain why Mayo Clinic, Seattle Children's, University of California, Stanford and a bunch more are all incorporating it into their patient care

It is because only now they are just coming out of the dark ages. Despite research going back decades it is only recently that doctors are finally admitting that probiotics are beneficial for IBD. And most GIs still believe that diet has nothing to do with Crohn's or UC.

So now we are seeing some medical facilities that are finally recognizing that diet can be effective. Of course they will first experiment with the SCD, despite its flaws the SCD is still the most famous of the IBD diets. And it does have benefits, I believe, because despite everything it drastically restricts gluten. And many IBDers are sensitive to gluten.

And there is no doubt that artificial sweeteners recommended by the SCD are poison for IBDers. If your excuse for not paying attention to student.societyforscience.org is because it is not reputable enough for you, then let me assure you that I have seen similar articles with similar conclusions in such reputable journals as Science, Nature, and the Scientific American.

I haven't read most of the thread, but this one caught my eye for some reason. I apologize for singling it out, when there are probably many other posts deserving a response.

Nevertheless....Your quote "Despite research going back decades it is only recently that doctors are finally admitting that probiotics are beneficial for IBD." Link? At each conference I've attended, the opposite conclusion has been reached: Doctors expect probiotics to help, but studies to date have shown they DO NOT HELP.

Your quote: "If your excuse for not paying attention to student.societyforscience.org is because it is not reputable enough for you, then let me assure you that I have seen similar articles with similar conclusions in such reputable journals as Science, Nature, and the Scientific American." Uhm, those are magazines, not journals.

Ambling

Here is some corrections to what you stated:

Ambling said...
1. Honey is a powerful bifidogenic. That is, it stimulates growth of Bifidobacteria. It seems odd that it is recommended (considered 'legal') given that the diet purports to starve out Bifidobacteria

This is not true - you are bulking ALL Bifidobacterium into one metabolism category - they do not ALL metabolize the various sugars in honey.   

Bacterial metabolism is very strain specific.  Applies to all other phylums as well.  Honey obviously has zero effect on some strains of Bifidobacterium.  

Ambling said...
2. Soluble fiber is a super-food for Bifidobacterium. There is a great deal of soluble fiber in fruit and vegetables which is incongruous with the diet

No, soluble fibre is not a "super food for Bifidobacterium”  this is untrue again.  a) for the same reason as above and b) in terms of soluble fibre the amount available to be present in the colon for fermentation depends solely on what’s NOT broken down and digested by “us” and our digestive enzymes during the route to the colon.

Once again, there are many molecular components to the soluble and non-soluble fibre found in various fruits and vegetables.  Some bacteria can metabolize these, some cannot, and some there is only one or two known bacteria that can metabolize them.  

Anyway, the principle reason for inclusion of certain specific fruits and veggies in SCD is simply because the majority is easily broken down to monosaccharides leaving minimal components left over for bacterial fermentation.   

This also comes back to antigen - dietary supplied food antigens.  The initial fruits and veggies in the intro to SCD and even the main diet itself are very low molecular weight, non complex and therefore minimally antigenic or more correctly “generally non-immunogenic" food components.    And again, as mentioned above bacterial metabolism of the left-overs is highly strain specific. 

Ambling said...
3. Bifidobacteria species are many and varied. They are generally considered vital to the health of the large bowel, yet all are considered unwanted by the diet.

They are considered unwanted by the diet as back then, sampling showed increased growth of Bifidobacterium in the colons of people with IBD based on testing methods back then.  Back then it was assumed that the increase in Bifidobacterium would perhaps be a “driver” in IBD.  Elaine’s thoughts on this were to seek ways to minimize this result (overgrowth) by using specific dietary adjustments to return them to normal levels. 

Flash forward some 50 years and and some serious progress in faecal and mucosal bacterial sampling techniques and it’s still common knowledge that there is an abundance of Bifidobacterium and even Lactobacteria in patients with IBD  -  what’s new compared to back then is that this is coupled with a significant loss of Clostridium.  Bacteria compete for nutrients, the loss of Clostridium leaves an opening for a gain in the others.  There is a bacterial food chain in our guts.

It is simply an interpretation of the data available at the time.  Now, it’s known that Bifidobacterium are most likely not the “cause” of the IBD - but that an overall change in bacterial composition may play a pro or perhaps pre-dominant role in IBD.   No one can say one way or the other on this this at the moment.

FYI - some strains of Bifidobacterium are actually PRO-Inflammatory and are not considered vital to health of the large bowel. So taking this into account it’s possible an overgrowth of adult strain Bifidobacteria could play a pro-inflammatory role. It cannot be said for sure one way or the other yet.

Ambling said...
5. There are only three introduced probiotics, in the yogurt. Two are Lactobacillus varieties, and the third is S. Thermophilus. These predominantly inhabit only the small bowel. There is no introduced probiotic for the large bowel.”

This is not the case.  Amounts of these specific bacteria can and do travel throughout the colon as well as pass through in measurable amounts in stool. 

Ambling said...
7.The exclusion of starchy vegetables and grains eliminates dietary sources of short-chain fatty acids, the preferred fuel for colon cells. Colonic cells function poorly without this fuel.

No - this is not really true.  The main source of short chain fatty acids is not dietarily at all - it is bacterial fermentation.  And the main bacteria associated with this is Clostridium, which again is greatly reduced in patients with IBD.  Its is the lack of Butyrate producing clostridium that is the cause of concern over dietary sources as again, these products (SCFA’s) are produced by bacterial fermentation.

Ambling said...
Liquid polymeric diets (containing intact proteins and complex carbohydrates) have been shown to be equally as effective as elemental diets in achieving remission. These include Ensure, with it's many so-called 'illegal' ingredients.

Yes- but the fact is that these “complex carbs” in liquid polymeric diets are not quite as complex and no where near as immunogenic as found in say regular wheat containing diets.  Overall the reduction in dietary antigen’s (or immunogen’s really) is most likely what lies at the root of the benefit of these diets as is stated in most of the studies on them.


-------------------------------------------------


In regards to the thread itself,

SCD or any of these diets are for sure worth trying.  Even if ultimately one fails.  And in this case, upon failing it can be worth trying to modify the diet to suit what works for you on an individual basis.  Taking the time to do this can yield some exceptional and surprising results.

To quote an email received from a Crohn’s researcher (or MAP researcher actually):

“Conventional therapy in Crohn's disease (except for a few lucky ones) is supportive at best and effective in lasting remission (>1 year) in only about 30% of patients. That includes all the new biologics at $7-10,000 a treatment. With those odds and success rates, why not try unconventional treatments – they cannot be much worse.”

Post Edited (Canada Mark) : 1/15/2015 5:38:24 PM (GMT-7)

Ides said...
Keep it civil folks or I will be forced to lock this thread.

Ides post seems to have been missed and/or ignored. We mods have been patient to this point, please try to be patient with your fellow forumites.

Jon

Larger studies have shown no benefit.

I actually don't pay attention to what the official studies say anymore than I pay attention to what the official diets proclaim. I listen to my gut, and my gut only.

Some probiotics are helpful for me and I listed them in my signature. But please recognize that everyone is different. For example, Align has been touted here as beneficial but for me it did not work. Other probiotics also had no effect on me, in fact some made me worse.